Catastrophic Effect

“A nuclear bomb is defined as ‘an explosive device that derives its destructive force from nuclear reactions, either fission or a combination of fission and fusion. Both reactions release vast quantities of energy from relatively small amounts of matter.’ “

Since their desired effect is ‘shock and awe’, WMD would be an attractive option to a cowardly force, seeking to inflict the most psychological and physical effects. Not all attacks require ‘mass casualty’ status to garner attention. According to the National Counterterrorism Council (2008), 11,800 terrorist attacks resulted in 54,000 deaths, injuries, and kidnappings. Excluding the outcome of 9/11, al Qaeda employs close-range attacks and generally inflicts casualties to small numbers. Since overt forces are stronger in the Middle East, I would anticipate a CBRN attack within their homeland, as the indigenous framework of sympathizers and extremists can deliver a larger-scale and better-organized attack. In consideration of Yamin’s (2013) findings, countries with terrorist links, such as Syria and Pakistan have publicly declared they produce and stockpile CBW. If terrorists receive financial backing and political shelter from these countries, there is a possibility of these weapons coming into their

An atomic bomb is a bomb that derives its destructive power from the rapid release

Weapons of mass destruction is “a nuclear, radiological, chemical, biological or other weapon that can kill and bring significant harm to a large number of humans or cause great damage to human-made structures (e.g. buildings), natural structures (e.g. mountains), or the biosphere” (Weapons of Mass Destruction). The main reason I believe that The War Powers Act of 1973 should stay the way that it is, is because if the president has suspicion of weapons of mass destruction then they can act quickly on getting into the country to try and find and control the situation. Then if Congress figures out there is no weapons or need to be invading a country, the troops will get out. An example of a president starting a war because of suspicion of weapons of mass destruction is when president Bush declared war on Iraq. I think that the founding fathers would would agree with The War Powers Act of 1973 because, they did not want a president who had too much power or seemed like a

The power to destroy a civilization with a single weapon surely should not exist; however, nothing can fully prohibit all nuclear weapons. The high casualties that Japan had encountered were a loud message to the whole rest of the world portraying that exact statement. The diseases and hardships that the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had dealt with are situations the world fears; therefore,

Weapons of mass destruction are ‘weapons that can devastate large areas and kill huge numbers of people’. There are 3 types of WMD’s; Nuclear Weapons, Biological Weapons and Chemical Weapons. In the world there are only 8 counties that own nuclear weapons and these include USA, Russia, UK, China, France, India and Pakistan and unofficially Israel. In this essay I will be looking at whether or not Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) can be justified, we can link this to the just war theory. I will also be looking at the 1945 Atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima and whether or not it can be justified.

Is the use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in war ethical? Is there an appropriate time to use them? A dilemma will later be presented for consideration. Different ethical theories can either support or oppose the use of CBW depending on the circumstances. However, chemical, biological and nuclear agents are dangerous, uncontrollable and undifferentiating weapons of mass destructions. Actions must be taken to see that there are no future instances of use during war. However, before one discusses the legal and ethical issues involved with CBW, one must understand what chemical, biological and nuclear weapons are and how they function.

The atomic bomb is a weapon of mass destruction. In other words, "In the atomic bomb, the very power of the universe had been harnessed to create the most destructive weapon imaginable." (Ogwyn 1) That catastrophic power of the universe was put into a weapon, a weapon that would later have the power in numbers to destroy the whole world and every soul in it. Even the scientists who created it knew of its tragic abilities when they said "We knew it was a war ending weapon, that’s what it was built

There are three major types of weapons of mass destruction and those are nuclear weapons, biological warfare agents, and chemical warfare agents. These weapons share their potential for large-scale destruction and the indiscriminate nature of their effects, notably against civilians. WMD’s challenges our peace and security here in the United States. There is a strategy for dealing with weapons of mass destructions, and it is the three pillars, which are counter proliferation, nonproliferation, and WMD consequence management. The United States has tried to stop other countries; however, it has gotten to a point that if the United States is attacked with nuclear weapons, then the U.S. will use WMD as a response to the attack. When it comes to weapons of mass destruction in the possession of hostile countries and even terrorists, it is one of the greatest security challenges facing the United States. The first strategy to combat WMD is counter proliferation to combat WMD use, counter proliferations are fully integrated into the basic doctrines, in trainings, and even equipping of all forces, since it is important for the U.S military and appropriate agencies to be prepared to deter and defend against any possible WMD event. With strengthened nonproliferation to combat WMD proliferation, in order to prevent states from acquiring WMD and missiles, we must enhance diplomacy, arms control, multilateral agreements, threat reduction assistance, and export controls. That is to slow and make it more costly to access sensitive technologies, materials, and expertise.

-- The original goal of the bombs was to create a display of military that is so powerful that anyone who wanted to attack the nation would be afraid to.

Chemical weapons are deadly, in-humane, not safe, and overkill. They are consider WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction) and have been on the rise since the early 1900s. These weapons are past and present proof that chemistry can crossover into technology. And have a huge impact on society for decades.

Weapons of mass destruction might be described as “weapon with the capacity to inflict death and destruction on such a massive scale and so indiscriminately that its very presence in the hands of a hostile power can be considered a grievous threat”(WMDC, 2006). Most weapons of mass destruction are nuclear, biological, or chemical. The term is a relatively new one, as it first appeared in December 1937 in an address by Archbishop Of Canterbury. Weapons of mass destruction may also include fierce fighting machines such as tanks and atomic missiles. These arms can cause massive damage to physical structures such as buildings, roads, and bridges (Graham & Talent, 2008). However, the meaning of the term was quite different from the way it is used in the contemporary international law. “Weapons of mass destruction” appear in the document signed by Harry Truman in 1945. After that, the term “weapons of mass destruction” was included in the titular resolution passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations (WMDC, 2006).

Are Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) able to be used ethically in time of war without consequences? A question with many different answers from all over the world, from children, adults, and elders alike. Today, we will review quite a few things about WMD’s, such as what uniquely defines the ability of WMD’s from that of the average weapons. We will also view who created them, and why they created them in the first place. Furthermore, we will look into what was stated earlier: Are WMD’s able to be used ethically in time of war without consequence? We’ll answer this and more, with the paragraphs ahead.

When we talk about weapons of mass destruction, we think of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons on earth. An example for a nuclear weapon is an atomic bomb called “little boy” and “fatman,” which were a gun-type weapon and the implosion-type. These were the first atomic bombs dropped by United States on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many scientists and engineers in the “Manhattan Project” developed these bombs. About 140,000 deaths were reported from the Hiroshima bombing. These innocent people were killed within seconds from these atomic bomb created from obligated scientists. Scientists and engineers have created something so powerful that can’t be undone. For example, when a country has nuclear weapons and wants to engage in a nuclear war, it won’t because of the destruction that it has to face to gain victory. Though, in the 21st

Have you ever noticed how dangerous the world can be? While some of us think that we are safe, there are a lot of people who disagree. Today we have all these bombs of mass destruction, and this is a great fear to a lot of people. We now have enough of these bombs worldwide, and it can wipe out most of living organisms. Yes, the U.S. does have these bombs for protection, but the U.S. isn’t the only one with them, there are a lot of countries that also have them, and this is what alarms everyone. Are these bombs truly our go to weapon when it’s time to fight? These bombs can leak radiation, cause damage and millions of casualties to our planet, but we won’t blink an eye once they are used on the people who have done us harm.